THE INTERNATIONAL Criminal Court (ICC) prosecution team has formally asked the Trial Chamber III to reject the defense’s ongoing challenge against eight disputed incidents, numbered 50 through 57, in the proceedings against former President Rodrigo Duterte.
According to the prosecution, the contested incidents fall comfortably within the scope of the charges already greenlit by the Pre-Trial Chamber.
The prosecutors maintained that introducing these specific incidents is simply a matter of fulfilling disclosure obligations—giving the defense proper notice of the evidence slated for presentation at trial—rather than altering the underlying charges.
Furthermore, the prosecution asserted that the notice was successfully delivered ahead of the Chamber’s Aug. 31, 2026, deadline.
Meanwhile, the defense disputed that legal boundary, adding that the eight disputed items introduced entirely new victims, specific dates, locations, or alleged perpetrators who were never part of the original incidents tabled during the confirmation stage.
Legal analysts note that simply meeting a disclosure deadline does not automatically resolve whether these incoming details fundamentally alter the material facts of the case that the Defense is required to answer, making individual judicial scrutiny critical.
The friction between both sides is sharply illustrated by the debate surrounding Incident 57.
The defense argued that the event falls completely outside the relevant charged time frame.
In response, the prosecution countered that the confirmed legal wording explicitly specifies “around July 2017” and should not be boxed in by a rigid calendar cutoff. Whether that phrasing legally extends to cover Incident 57 remains a question for the bench, as the prosecution’s interpretation carried no formal ruling weight on its own.
With the prosecution urging the Chamber to dismiss the defense motion outright, the formal legal scope and admissibility of the eight incidents remain heavily contested pending a definitive decision from the judges.
